Association between Marginal Bone Loss around Osseointegrated Mandibular Implants and Smoking Habits: A 10-year Follow-up Study

SAGE Publications - Tập 76 Số 10 - Trang 1667-1674 - 1997
Lars Lindquist1, Gunnar E. Carlsson1, Torsten Jemt2
1Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Odontology, Goteborg University, Medicinaregatan 12, S-41390 Goteborg, Sweden
2The Branemark Clinic, Public Dental Health Service, Goteborg, Sweden

Tóm tắt

While many factors are conceivable, occlusal loading and plaque-induced inflammation are frequently stated as the most important ones negatively affecting the prognosis of oral implants. Currently, little is known about the relative importance of such factors. The aim of this study was to analyze the influence of smoking and other possibly relevant factors on bone loss around mandibular implants. The participants were 45 edentulous patients, 21 smokers and 24 non-smokers, who were followed for a 10-year period after treatment with a fixed implant-supported prosthesis in the mandible. The peri-implant bone level was measured on intraoral radiographs, information about smoking habits was based on a careful interview, and oral hygiene was evaluated from clinical registration of plaque accumulation. Besides standard statistical methods, multiple linear regression models were constructed for estimation of the relative influence of some factors on peri-implant bone loss. The long-term results of the implant treatment were good, and only three implants (1%) were lost. The mean marginal bone loss around the mandibular implants was very small, about 1 mm for the entire 10-year period. It was greater in smokers than in non-smokers and correlated to the amount of cigarette consumption. Smokers with poor oral hygiene showed greater marginal bone loss around the mandibular implants than those with good oral hygiene. Oral hygiene did not significantly affect bone loss in non-smokers. Multivariate analyses showed that smoking was the most important factor among those analyzed for association with peri-implant bone loss. The separate models for smokers and non-smokers revealed that oral hygiene had a greater impact on peri-implant bone loss among smokers than among non-smokers. This study showed that smoking was the most important factor affecting the rate of peri-implant bone loss, and that oral hygiene also had an influence, especially in smokers, while other factors, e.g., those associated with occlusal loading, were of minor importance. These results indicate that smoking habits should be included in analyses of implant survival and peri-implant bone loss.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Adell R., Lekholm U., Branemark P-I. (1985). Surgical procedures. In: Tissue-integrated prostheses. Osseointegration in clinical dentistry. Branemark P-I, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T, editors. Chicago: Quintessence, pp. 211-232.

10.1016/S0300-9785(86)80010-2

Albrektsson T., 1986, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1, 11

10.3109/00016355909011228

Bain CA, 1993, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 8, 609

10.1111/j.1600-051X.1987.tb02253.x

Bolin A., 1987, Gerodontics, 3, 43

Bolin A., 1993, Swed Dent, 17, 211

10.1016/S0022-3913(83)80101-2

Brunski JB, Skalak R. (1992). Biomechanical considerations. In: Advanced osseointegration surgery: Applications in the maxillo-facial region . Worthington P, Branemark P-I, editors. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co., pp. 15-39.

Carlsson GE, Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress of Osseointegration

Carlsson GE, 1994, Int J Prosthodont, 5, 448

10.1034/j.1600-0501.1994.050410.x

Friberg B., 1991, Int j Oral Maxillofac Implants, 6, 142

10.1097/00008505-199409000-00004

Haber J., 1994, Curr Opin Periodontol, 12

10.1902/jop.1993.64.1.16

10.1177/00220345950740010201

10.1259/dmfr.1980.0019

10.1034/j.1600-0501.1994.050304.x

Jemt T., 1989, Int j Oral Maxillofac Implants, 4, 211

10.1016/S0300-9785(86)80011-4

Leonhardt A., 1996, Studies on bacterial relation to titanium (dissertation)

10.1034/j.1600-0501.1992.030102.x

Lindquist LW, 1987, Swed Dent J Suppl, 48, 1

10.3109/00016358509064138

Lindquist LW, 1987, Quintessence Int, 18, 89

10.1016/0022-3913(88)90109-6

10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070405.x

10.1016/0266-4356(88)90093-9

10.1097/00006534-197804000-00013

10.1111/j.1600-0528.1986.tb01093.x

10.1111/j.1600-051X.1990.tb01098.x

Quirynen M. (1993). Tissue response to loading and microbiota. In: Osseointegration in oral rehabilitation. An introductory textbook . Naert I, van Steenberghe D, Worthington P, editors. London: Quintessence Publ. Co. , pp. 171-180.

Quirynen M., 1991, J Head Neck Pathol, 10, 43

10.1034/j.1600-0501.1992.030302.x

Rangert B., 1989, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 4, 241

10.14219/jada.archive.1979.0052

10.1016/0022-3913(83)90361-X

Strid K-G. (1985). Radiographic results. In: Tissue-integrated prostheses. Osseointegration in clinical dentistry. Branemark P-I, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T, editors. Chicago: Quintessence Publ. Co., Inc., pp. 317-327.

Thomson MR, 1993, J Western Soc Periodontol, Periodont Abstr, 41, 5

US Department of Health and Human Services ( 1989). Reducing the health consequences of smoking: A report of the Surgeon General. US Public Health Service, Office on Smoking and Health. DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 81-50156, p. 269.

Wennerberg A., 1996, On surface roughness and implant incorporation (dissertation)

Weyant RJ, 1994, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 9, 95

10.1016/0022-3913(90)90153-4

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

SAGE Publications

Tập 76 Số 10

1667-1674

Thông tin tác giả